Talk:Champions (Earth-616)
Leadership Why was Ms. Marvel made leader? She has a lot of heart and I genuinely like her for it, but she's inexperienced and overly emotional. Cyclops would have been the logical choice. DCLover1995 (talk) 03:26, May 2, 2017 (UTC) :In their series, they have yet to establish a leader, rather, Ms. Marvel was mentioned as the leader of the Champions in her bio from .--MysteryScooby (talk) 20:26, May 9, 2017 (UTC) Membership Status Where did the "Reserve" designation come from? At face value it seems like fanon. -- Annabell (talk) 03:17, July 7, 2018 (UTC) :I believe "Reserve" was used as a shorter way to express that "They're part of the broader Champions movement, but aren't on the front line team right now. They're only a text message away if they're needed" as Jim Zub put it (x). --The ADour-incible ADour (talk) 03:21, July 7, 2018 (UTC) ::Right, but we don't put the X-Men that show up in the background of one issue every other year as "Reserve," so I'm not sure we should be doing that here. -- Annabell (talk) 03:22, July 7, 2018 (UTC) :::I find that the X-Men are a particular case since which members get the spotlight depends on the whim of the writers most of the time, since from an in-universe pespective, all members of the staff and students are X-Men even if only ten of them are the stars of the adventures. I don't see an issue with clarifying which members are in the Champions' reserve, since it's a distinction that also seems to impact the team in-universe, because those reserve members don't even hang out regularly with the team. --The ADour-incible ADour (talk) 03:37, July 7, 2018 (UTC) ::::I have an issue with it because it's a fanon term. For example, what if I insist they're not "Reserve" they're "Auxiliary" instead. Am I wrong? No, because "Reserve" is a made-up term for their membership, i.e. it's not canon, it's not used anywhere, and thus they shouldn't be listed on the article as such. -- Annabell (talk) 03:47, July 7, 2018 (UTC) :::::Reserve is not an official term for their membership, but it's what they are by definition. While I don't have a problem with using "Auxiliary" instead, aren't both terms more or less the same? --The ADour-incible ADour (talk) 03:53, July 7, 2018 (UTC) ::::::That's my point. When they're fanon terms being inserted into canon material we can argue about it endlessly without either side being wrong, yet neither is official, thus they simply don't belong. Zub didn't say they should be noted as lesser members, he said they're still members. -- Annabell (talk) 03:56, July 7, 2018 (UTC) :::::::He did say they aren't on the "front line team" and that they're in the "broader" Champions movement. That places them in a different level. I don't see why would we need either Marvel or Zub explicitly using the term "reserve members" to call them that, when they're that by definition. --The ADour-incible ADour (talk) 04:08, July 7, 2018 (UTC) ::::::::Just to be clear, what you're suggesting is a precedent that from now on we can all use whatever fanon terms we want to describe perceived levels of membership on various articles? -- Annabell (talk) 04:34, July 7, 2018 (UTC) :::::::::Why is it such a big deal in the first place? --DCLover1995 (talk) 04:44, July 7, 2018 (UTC) ::::::::::That's not a correct extrapolation of what I'm arguing. I'm suggesting using a term to describe the status of members of this team in particular, a term which fits to a T the characteristics of the status of those members as decribed by the author. It's not just a "perceived" level if the writer even made a specific distinction between those members and what he calls the "front line team." --The ADour-incible ADour (talk) 04:46, July 7, 2018 (UTC) :::::::::::I find it unnecessary to split them like that because we'll have to move them to the proper grouping whenever a member become active/inactive. We can avoid doing such trivial edits by listing them all together instead, as it was before the split. :::::::::::--TMAO (talk) 04:50, July 7, 2018 (UTC)